On Friday, Congress finally gave up trying to pass an ill advised piece of legislation called the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the House, and the Protect Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) it’s sister bill in the Senate. Rep. Lamar Smith from TX, SOPA’s main sponsor pulled the bill saying, "I have heard from the critics and I take seriously their concerns…" following up with, "we need to revisit the approach on how best to address the problem of foreign thieves that steal…"

The biggest disappointment for me was how this debate was reduced to how you were either for piracy (anti-SOPA) or against piracy (pro-SOPA). Or inversely – you were either for (anti SOPA) or against civil liberties (pro SOPA). There are smart, considerate people on both sides of the issue, as well as, idiots encamped on both sides of the idealogical divide. Some of these folks are even my friends.

The truth of the matter is that this issue is so much more complex then some critics and supporters care to admit. But one thing is clear – all stakeholders – and by that I mean creators, consumers, technology experts, advocates, entrepreneurs, big & small, independents and major players need to be invited to the table when the next iteration of talks regarding proposed legislation takes place. And along with discussions about legislation – there need to be serious, honest and meaningful conversations regarding innovation and collaboration across the music and technology divide.

It is no longer OK for those in the tech camp to say that intellectual property is an archane concept. It is also no longer acceptable for folks in music to shrug their shoulders and say they don’t understand technology and that they want industry profits to go back to the massive CD bubble of the late 90s/early 2000s. It is also unreasonable for the music industry to say that the entire deficit in earnings is primarily attributed to piracy and not take ownership of their own failings in the era of loss opportunities.

Both sides need each other. Where there is distrust, dialogue fails. We then end up with massive messes like the proposed SOPA/PIPA acts. Letting politicans and lobbyists dictate our futures in the halls of Congress is a recipe for disaster. Shame on those who have capitalized on this dysfunction to further their own agendas.

I also believe there is a bright future. In our efforts to try and educate artists, musicians & other stakeholders about new internet technologies it is obvious that youth "get it." It is the old guard that is having the most trouble with contemporary concepts. This is encouraging.

Finally, musicians, filmmakers and other creatives need to tell our own stories directly to fans and consumers in a far more effective way. We need to bypass politicians and lobbyists like the MPAA and the RIAA. These organizations represent big money interests. Just as the primary goal of Google and other web companies is to create a positive cash flow. As someone who lives in both the music and technology worlds, as well as, as that of an artist who has his works illegally re-purposed on those "foreign rogue" web sites, I have immense faith in the goodwill of the people who consume my art. I just need to focus on creating an experience so powerful for my tribe that the resulting emotional bond motivates them to support me as a member of their community. Everything else is wasted energy.

No one should underestimate the power of a song, movie or story. Just as no one should discount the power of the Internet. These treasures should remain where they belong – in the hands of the people.

Introduction

What Is SOPA?

How We Got Here

The RIAA’s Recent History

The Effect of Piracy on Music

Existing Statutes

SOPA From An Artist’s Perspective

But They’re Stealing My Stuff!

Where To From Here

Introduction

Photo of Tootsie’s Nashville by Kathleen Tyler Conklin.
Creative Commons License.

I am a Nashville based performing songwriter, bioinformaticist and digital music strategist. I am also the director of a hands-on, immersive digital music educational experience called Rock Your Net. Rock Your Net teaches artists, musicians, songwriters and other music business professionals how to leverage the ‘Net to market and promote music.

I grew up in a country where filtering and blocking web sites was not unusual. This was especially true if the "offending" site espoused ideas and thoughts contrary to that of the government’s. Due process could also be a problem if the authorities deemed your activities illegal. As hard as it is to believe my home country is a constitutional democracy. You should also know that I am a recently naturalized US citizen.

Living in Nashville, I have many friends in the mainstream music business. I love and support them in whatever form that makes sense. I work with them on almost a daily basis. However as an independent musician and music technology entrepreneur I sometimes find the approach of the mainstream music establishment to music business problems archaic and obsolete.

Some of my friends within the major label infrastructure share the same frustrations. But sometimes it’s hard to speak truth to power and everybody needs to put food on their table.

This fall some members of Congress introduced the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). The bill is being pushed by the RIAA & the MPAA.

My friend and strategic partner, Alex Curtis of The Creators Freedom Project (started by Public Knowledge) asked me if I would go to Washington, DC to speak about my own experiences as an independent musician and music business entrepreneur. After reading much of it at Open Congress (follow the money trail), I decided that this bill was a bad idea and bad policy.

So I joined forces with a small but dedicated group of artists and tech innovators to work against this bill. One of the first things we heard from folks on the other side was how we don’t represent artists and creatives. I’m not sure who gets to decide who does or doesn’t represent any particular segment in the halls of Congress. But, I’m pretty sure the entities espousing this bill on behalf of artists, songwriters and creatives don’t represent my views and those of forward thinking artists. Just ask Janis Ian.

What is SOPA?

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), also known as H.R. 3261, is the House version of a bill in Congress meant to give law enforcement tools to go after offshore web sites that are alleged to have infringing intellectual property (IP) content and/or dedicated to intellectual property theft. The bill covers music, movies, software and even other forms of IP that are vulnerable to counterfeiting such as clothes or fashion items.

Here’s a cool infographic about the legislation.

(click on the graphic above for the full infographic)

The bill could also enable the US Department of Justice (DOJ) to seek court orders preventing payment processors and ad networks from facilitating transactions on these sites. The DOJ can also order that these sites be blocked, filtered and/or removed from the Domain Name Registry, an international directory service of sites on the internet. DOJ can also prevent these sites from appearing in search engine results. Further, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) can be asked to block their users from these alleged infringing sites. Indeed, would be held liable if their network passively enabled the download of infringing content.

And lastly, it enables a particularly virulent form of private right of action against "alleged infringing sites."

(Public Knowledge’s information packet on SOPA for the lay person)

How We Got Here

In 1999/2000, Napster came into prominence and was subsequently sued into oblivion by the recording industry. Prior to going out of business, Napster reportedly offered US$1 Billion to license music from the majors. The industry at that time was a $14 Billion industry.

The demise of Napster resulted in a slew of other P2P services. History has shown that the music biz screwed up. Geoff Taylor of the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) and Hilary Rosen who was the CEO of the RIAA at the time, both now wish the industry had embraced Napster.

Here are telling quotes from Ms. Rosen in a 2009 Billboard interview about Napster and the music industry:

"I’ve been quoted as saying the record companies should have jumped off the cliff and signed a deal. I thought it at the time. It was well documented that I privately urged that. But it would have been jumping off a cliff, and people have to understand that."

"The lessons of Napster, of rapid fire adoption, have been too quickly forgotten. The industry has moved a little too slow and have not benefited as much as they might have by the benefits of technology."

"I think the RIAA became the central organizing vehicle for people’s anger. But they don’t work for the consumers. They work for the industry. It’s the business leaders in the industry that are calling the shots there."

Shortly thereafter the music business began losing revenue. The industry has attributed most or all of this loss of revenue to piracy and illegal downloading. Consequently they have focussed their energies on legal and legislative efforts, as opposed to, a commitment to innovative and consumer friendly initiatives and services.

SOPA, from this musician’s perspective, represents another legislative maneuver in the repertoire of the RIAA and their ilk to exercise control over the channels of distribution.

The Effect of Piracy

The music industry via the RIAA has claimed for a decade now that most or all of the loss of revenue in the music business has been due to piracy. The problem that SOPA is supposed to fix is piracy and counterfeiting.

From the RIAA web site:

In the decade since peer-to-peer (p2p) file-sharing site Napster emerged in 1999, music sales in the U.S. have dropped 47 percent, from $14.6 billion to $7.7 billion.

Here is a graphic from TechDirt that shows how much majors made/lost in that period:

There have also been independent empirical academic studies on just this very issue and the following papers had this to say about the correlation between downloading and piracy/sales.

At the end of 2010, a pro industry/anti-piracy research group surveyed Public BT – a public torrent tracker service site and came up with this summary represented here in this graphic, published by Ars Technica. Note how music is only the 6th most popular type of media downloaded. No. 1 and 2 is video (pornography and non-pornographic TV/Film Content). At the time of this study, 10 music albums were in the Top 100.

source: Ars Technica/Envisional Study

Another study at Princeton had similar findings. But here is a Washington Post analysis of the Public BT study that suggests that piracy may be a service problem.

(By the way, the pornography industry has managed to out maneuver some of the effects of piracy. I think there are some lessons for the music industry here. Look for a blog post in the future about how the music industry can adopt these strategies. No, seriously ;-} )

In a 2003 & 2004 study, researchers at the Univ. of Pennsylvania found that downloaders spent $25 (or 20%) less ($101) than non downloaders ($126). Predicting 10-20% loss in sales in downloaders. But also noting that it was difficult to extrapolate because objective data was scarce. (FYI – $25 in 2004 is $28.61 in 2010 dollars)

A 2007 Study commissioned by Industry Canada, the equivalent of the Canadian Dept of Economic Development, and performed by the University of London suggests that for every one CD downloaded, 0.44 of a CD equivalent is purchased. This study provides evidence that P2P file sharing actually has a positive effect on music purchases and little to no effect in the segment of the population aged 15 and over.

A British study in 2009 by think tank, Demos (outsourced to iPSos) found that downloaders buy more or the same amount of music as those who do not illegally file share. Ars Technica summarized the results.

Of those that buy more music after downloading, 93% bought CDs/vinyl or paid downloads. 78% bought CDs/vinyl and 54% bought paid downloads (source: Demos data). The Industry Canada study also suggests that the real reason for lower revenues is the conversion of music consumers from the album format to the singles format.

A more recent analysis by Michael DeGusta using some of the numbers of the RIAA but corrected for population and market categories seems to indicate the same finding.

How Music Industry Makes It’s Money

What People Are Buying Now

The Era of the Single

Finally the US Government Accounting Office (GAO) released a 2010 report that supports the above findings in some form or another. But most importantly they stress that "industry numbers" (see the RIAA, MPAA et. al.) assume a 1:1 substitution rate for piracy to predicted purchases. The substitution rate determines what percentage of pirated downloads would convert to paid downloads if piracy was eliminated. The RIAA claims the conversion would be 100% or a 1:1 substitution rate. The GAO also confirms that the assumed substitution rate is inaccurate and that it is "difficult, if not impossible, to quantify the economy-wide impacts."

Greg Sandoval reviews this report on CNET.

So as we can see, the actual effects of piracy on recorded music though not negligible or minimal, are nowhere near what is claimed by the RIAA. In fact there seems to be at least an 80% net effect discrepancy in the RIAA’s report vs other independent, objective analyses.

Bandcamp, an online music marketing platform heavily used by indie musicians, has new data that supports the thesis:

a) if you give fans an easy way to support the artist; and

b) if you offer them a great user experience.

You can shortcircuit a potential act of piracy into a real purchase.

It’s also worth noting that while the RIAA and everyone in their camp have been complaining about piracy and declining music sales, CD Baby and TuneCore the main aggregators for digital music distribution used by indie artists are reporting sales in excess of $350 Million dollars in just the last 3 years. In each of those cases, there was no "down" year.

RIAA’s History With Songwriters and Artists

One of the organizations that purports to rights of content creators, at least in the music space, is the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). However as Ms. Rosen points out in the above Billboard interview, the RIAA doesn’t represent content creators. It represents the content rights owners and exploiters. Sometimes at the expense of artists and creatives.

The following examples illustrate the RIAA’s unscrupulous tactics.

A chief counsel for the Congressional copyright subcomittee sneaked in a midnight amendment in the 1999 Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act which effectively rendered all future recordings by label artists as "works for hire" thereby rendering them ineligibile for copyright recapture in 2013.

That counsel was Mitch Glazier – who upon being caught on trying to get this amendment inserted – left for the RIAA. He got a pay raise from $80,000 to almost $600,000/yr. Mr. Glazier was subsequently promoted to Executive Senior VP at the RIAA.

The Artists Coalition led by Don Henley, Sheryl Crow and great investigative reporting by Billboard, managed to get that amendment repealed.

The congressman for whom Glazier worked at the time, Rep, Howard Coble, even resorted to petty criticism of Don Henley. Refusing to acknowledge that a member of his own staff made a conscious effort to hurt artists intellectual property. Yet, here he is now supporting SOPA.

It should be noted here, that some label heads were reportedly against this amendment but the RIAA went ahead and requested Mr. Glazier to insert the amendment. Which incidentally he had no authority to do.

In their zeal to prosecute piracy, the RIAA has pursued litigation against 12 year olds and 66 year old grandmothers.

The RIAA’s answer to piracy, their "investment" in education by litigation (a quote attributed to Mitch Bainwol at a Leadership Music Digital Summit event) effort yielded the following results:

Between 2006-2008, the RIAA spent $64M to recover $1.4M in damages. This is a 2% return.

In 2008 alone, they spent $17.6M to get $391,000. This is a 0.02% return.

By any objective measure, this is a failing grade for any kind of investment. Let alone efforts to fight privacy. In the real world, this normally results in people losing their jobs. If a fraction of that $64M was invested in innovation and legitimate educational efforts as opposed to litigation, the industry may be so much further ahead in terms of developing a better business model.

In recent history the RIAA has also fought to lower the royalty rate for music recordings from 9 cents to 5 cents and also even more recently argued that most recordings are not eligible for copyright recapture. (see above)

So their claim that the RIAA is for artist and songwriter rights is disingenuous to say the least.

Abuses of Existing Statutes

Even without SOPA, laws already in place such as the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) and the PRO-IP Act of 2008 have potential for huge abuses. These abuses are aptly demonstrated by the dajaz1 and MegaUpload cases. The dajaz1 site was in limbo for a year. MegaUpload’s video was reinstated by YouTube & a district court judge without a coherent explanation from UMG’s counsel.

This bill has very little to do with protecting IP and everything to do with power and keeping a stranglehold on the channels of distribution. Loss of control of channels of consumption for the old school music business means loss of revenue from traditional income streams that feed an obsolete business infrastructure.

Artists who have learned to leverage free and open forms of communication now find themselves in a position of power. But traditional power brokers who have gotten used to being in charge want to keep it that way.

Looking At SOPA As An Artist

The tenor of the entire bill is one of "shoot first, ask questions later." Besides some concerns of censorship, the bill presents these troubling issues.

Definitions

An Infringing Site

What is an infringing site?

Apparently almost any site can fall under this definition. Also .edu and .gov sites are not exempt. But .us, .net and .org are exempt from the application of this law. This makes no sense.

Section 102 reads:

Operated in a manner that would, if it were a domestic Internet site, subject it (or its associated domain name) to:

Seizure or forfeiture in the U.S. in an action brought by the Attorney General, by reason of an act prohibited by sections 2318, 2319, 2319A, 2319B, or 2320, or chapter 90, of 18 U.S.C.; or

Prosecution by the Attorney General under sections 1204 of title 17, United States Code, by reason of a violation of section 1201 of such title.

Any illegal act such as smoking pot or failing to pay your taxes makes you potentially subject to "seizure & forfeiture" in the US.

From the Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT):

The amendment’s modified definition of sites that can be targeted for suits by the Attorney General remains entirely open-ended. Any site is subject to prosecution as an “infringement site” if its domain name, were it domestic, would be eligible for seizure. Seizure law allows for seizure of any property that is used “in any manner or part” to commit or facilitate illegal activity. That means a website with 99% lawful activity and no bad intent can qualify as an infringement site based on a small amount of infringing activity by users.

End result: The A.G. would have carte blanche to go after virtually any user-generated content site, whenever it wants to. They are all punishable as “infringement sites” by the terms of this bill.

This also puts sites like ReverbNation & SoundCloud (a German service) squarely in the DOJ’s sites. Why? Because eventhough they are dot coms, their "content delivery networks" (cdns) may exist outside of the United States. There are also cloud services that utilize servers outside of the US that are properties or contractors of US based companies.

Other possible targets of action:

Internet search engines & Service Providers & Payment Network providers and Ad services.

Measures:

• prevent site from showing up in search reports (ie. censorship)
• prevent resolving to the foreign infringing site domain name’s IP address (DNS filtering)
• halt payment processing

Section 103

Embedded media requires an HTML5 browser

What is a site dedicated theft?

The definition looks a lot narrower and cleaner. But it turns out when you read further down in the doc, even infringing sites can be defined as "sites dedicated to theft." Which now makes .coms, .orgs vulnerable.

Site is primarily designed or operated for the purpose of, has only limited purpose or use other than, or is marketed by operator or another acting in concert with that operator primarily for use in, offering goods or services in violation of sections 501 or 1201 of title 17 or certain provisions of the Lanham Act OR the operator of the site operates the site with the object of promoting, or has promoted, its use to carry out acts that constitute a violation of section 501 or 1201 of title 17, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster such violation.

Again from the CDT:

By including a private right of action, the amendment still undermines the predictable legal environment that the DMCA sought to create for online services.

Under current law, a site that complies with section 512 of the DMCA gets safe harbor protection against copyright suits seeking monetary damages.

But under SOPA, that same site could still face lawsuits seeking to cut off its sources of revenue. In effect, a litigious rights holder gets a second bite at the apple, this time without having to worry about that pesky safe harbor. That’s bad for online innovation, as it gives rights holders a powerful club with which to threaten emerging online services.

That risk might be reduced if the private right of action were strictly limited to foreign entities that would otherwise be outside U.S. jurisdiction. But the bill would allow suits against any website registered to a non-U.S. domain name, even if the parent company is U.S.-based. So U.S. Internet companies with sites registered in foreign country domains would be fair game. That’s evident from the fact that the bill, in both sections 102 and 103, talks about “in personam” actions – it envisions actions against parties that are fully subject to U.S. jurisdiction, even though such parties are already subject to strong legal tools to address infringement.

Immunity

In Section 105, a private rights holder can notify an ISP, web provider, advertiser or payment processor that a site is an infringing site or dedicated to theft. If the ISP or advertiser or payment processor is convinced there is "reasonable belief" (what is reasonable?), they can shut off or shutdown the site pre-emptively without any repercussions. Thereby granting the ISP/provider/payment processor immunity from prosecution. This circumvents due process.

The site owner would have no recourse.

"No cause of action shall lie in any Federal or State court or administrative agency against, no person may rely in any claim or cause of action against, and no liability for damages to any person shall be granted against, (providers) for taking any action described in section 102(c)(2), section 103(d)(2), or section 103(b) with respect to an Internet site, or otherwise voluntarily blocking access to or ending financial affiliation with an Internet site, in the reasonable belief that–

(1) the Internet site is a foreign infringing site or is an Internet site dedicated to theft of U.S. property; and"

Security

Stewart Baker former NSA analyst and advisor to the President on national security issues is against SOPA. Even in version 2.0. In order to implement SOPA, would require that IPS bypass or circumvent a security protocol in network technology called DNSSEC. DNSSEC verifies the identities of a web site or domain name. DNSSEC is designed to protect networks from forged Domain Name Service(DNS) data or DNS cache poisoning. The DNS data then becomes unreliable, corrupt or poisoned and rapidly proliferates throughout the Internet. Ironically, in it’s desire to neutralize IP piracy, SOPA could enable DNS or network piracy.

DNS filtering

DNS filtering or rerouting is the most egregious form of censorship proposed in SOPA. Here is an explanation of why DNS filtering and blocking is bad.

SOPA Can Break DNS

When you block, filter and reroute net traffic, you control what the public gets to see and hear online. The Stanford Law Review published a position paper on this. Read their take:

Don’t Break The Internet

Piracy is bad. Censorship is worse. The above by the way is an analysis of rev 2 of the bill. Which is the "less bad" version of the bill.

The bill also seems to confine the Internet and it’s related networks to pre-defined geographical borders. The Internet though subject to the regulation of a central body and the laws of it’s specific countries, is essentially a decentralized system. There seems to be a fundamental lack of understanding of how the Internet works within the Judiciary Committee.

But yet, they won’t allow Internet experts to testify.

If all of this is confusing and anxiety provoking to you, you are not alone. This is the same Attorney General who has been involved with The Fast and The Furious controversy. This Congress also recently approved the indefinite detention of American citizens if they are suspected of terrorist activities.

Giving the judiciary an entirely overbroad and so powerful a tool to enforce copyright is probably not a good idea.

But They Are Stealing My Stuff…

I believe piracy is a real problem. No question.

However, the extent to which it has singularly affected the music industry is open to debate. The data seems to indicate that the problem is nowhere near as extensive as the RIAA seems to suggest. A roughly 30% piracy rate (according to even the industry’s own research initiatives) seems more reasonable. This would account for about a $2 Billion revenue loss over 7 years. Given the state of the world economy in recent years that doesn’t seem too outrageous a loss to expect. Roughly prorated that is a just under 15% per annum loss of revenue.

Piracy will never be completely eradicated. Expending an obscene amount of resources to fight piracy seems ridiculous to this observer. Seems we would be better served investing those resources in a better experience for the music consumer and for a more efficient distribution service for the content creator.

Those of us looking at innovations in the music industry believe piracy is mostly a service problem. Not a criminal one. We believe a lot of illegal behavior, at least in music, can be solved with better consumer services for music. This was the finding of even the industry sponsored Envisional/NBC study.

To some extent Spotify seems to be one such solution. Certainly it is a great consumer experience. But for indie musicians it has been an awful platform for monetizing musical assets. This, however, has to more to do with inequities within the creative culture of the United States. The folks from Spotify licensed music from the majors with a huge upfront payment. Independents saw very little or none of those monies.

To those who say, "Well, we have to do something! They’re stealing our stuff…" Beginning with the DMCA in 1999, there have been a whole lot of "somethings" that have been implemented by the copyright police in the pursuit of trying to shut down piracy. As of yet, they have not solved the problem. Now we are chasing after "foreign rogue" web sites.

Some of the laws enacted to stop piracy

Creating and enforcing laws to protect intellectual property is important. But how we go about doing this is just as important. If not these legal instruments become tools of oppressions. Trust me, I know…

When things are bad, it’s nice to point to a bogeyman to fault for our own shortcomings. Piracy has become this bogeyman for the music industry. Independents as a whole would be better served trying to find out where they have the most impressions globally. Services like Big Champagne can help get you some of that data. As Bandcamp has demonstrated – a potential "pirate" can turn into a consumer.

As an independent, if you are not making your music available and marketing direct to fan (DTF), you are missing a huge opportunity.

To quote Tim O’Reilly: "Obscurity is a far greater threat to authors and creative artists than piracy."

Where To From Here?

I have a lot of respect for some of the individuals who are for SOPA. They are well intentioned folks who believe this legislation will be the magic bullet the music industry so badly needs to build a vibrant future. However at this point, SOPA has been hijacked by special interests. The music industry has been slow to adapt to changes in technology and the new realities of dealing in a contemporary music market. They are now experiencing the consequences of ignoring this reality.

The entrenched old guard want SOPA because they feel major labels and middlemen need to control distribution. In turn indies are denied an equitable market share. If anything this year has proven that indies need to be awarded more opportunities Not less. A larger segment of the listening public deserve the right to listen to indie based music. Even on commercial radio stations in primary markets.

The inherent danger SOPA presents is that in the process of "protecting" corporate interests, the distribution, access & discovery platforms the Internet provides for independent artists, musicians and songwriters will be crippled or obliterated.

The present copyright and music business laws are woefully inadequate to deal with the new music business. I believe it is time to undertake universal copyright and artistic rights reform legislation in this country.

In the coming weeks, I shall propose some ideas and initiatives that may be of interest to folks interested in moving this discussion forward.

I really want to encourage an honest and open discussion about SOPA. Feel free to comment below. I recognize this is an emotional topic. It’s fine to be angry and upset. But I do insist that the dialogue here be civil and respectful. Would love to know your thoughts pro and con per SOPA.

This article would not be possible without advice and clarification from Alex Curtis of Creators Freedom on the legal aspects of SOPA.

Intro To Digital Marketing Series

On Wednesday, January 18th we again present Rock Your Net’s hugely successful & popular “Intro To Digital Marketing” workshop series. The series is a hands-on, interactive internet music marketing seminar targetting musicians, artists, songwriters, publishers and their affiliated managers. By the end of the series you will be able to:

• Create and implement a plan to market your music.
• Build and extend your online presence & infrastructure with tools such as Virb, BandZoogle, BandCamp, Reverbnation and TopSpin.
• Use YouTube, FaceBook & Twitter to build awareness for your band and your brand.
• Learn how to acquire and engage your fans. Help them help you have a sustainable music career.
• Set up an online store to sell your music and merchandise direct to fan (DTF).

  When: January 18th, 25th & February 1st & 8th.

  Time: 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm.

  Where: ESPACES

  We recommend you come to all sessions since we’ll be covering different topics each week. But you’re welcome to come to as many as you are able to attend. Space limited to 25 participants per session. If you sign up prior to January 11th, you’re eligible for an early bird discount.

The workshops will be held at ESPACES – a state of the art meeting, teaching and workspace facility(near St Thomas Hospital) minutes from Nashville’s Music Row on Harding Rd.

Bring your laptop. Take it with you. Rock happily ever after.

Register for Workshop

Intro To Digital Marketing – Complete Series

Power Tools – WordPress & Topspin

Register Now

Intro To Digital Marketing – Single Sessions

Weds., January. 18th :: Session I – Introduction, Overview, Setting Goals

The FaceBook event invite. Feel free to share. This music technology educational initiative is possible due to the generosity of and awesome sponsors such as: If you are unable to attend, please sign up on our mailing list to get information and updates about future workshops. Graphics & web support by Michael Lovett of Phat Magnet Media. “It’s Not New Media Anymore” slogan courtesy of Rachel Barnhard of BigData Marketing.

This year the mainstream music establishment was preoccupied with letting the indie/DIY community know they were "Not Good Enough." In fact, some gatekeeping factions of even the DIY/Indie community seemed to reinforce this theme (more on this later).

Who’s A Grammy Darling?

The rumblings started in February at The Grammys when Esperanza Spalding won Best New Artist over better known names like Mumford and Sons and Justin Bieber. So much so, A member of Bieber’s Army hacked her Wikipedia site to say "Who Are You Anyway?"

Bieber also labelled the night "a failure" because he didn’t win.

In the same month, The Civil Wars released "Barton Hollow" that promptly became the #1 downloaded album on iTunes and #1 on the Billboard Digital Albums chart.

Yet some folks still have a tough time accepting their success.

The Grammys didn’t even consider them for Best New Artist. Although, they have been nominated for Best Folk Album & Best Country Duo/Group Performance. Oddly without much major country radio airplay when it mattered.

And this year at a major music conference, an established music manager all but called them a fluke. I was right there in the audience. I had this feeling the rockstar manager was just bummed that he wasn’t the one who "broke" The Civil Wars. So props to TCW management team, Sensibility Music.

Seems like all the critical acclaim and all the commercial success is still "Not Good Enough."

If You’re Not Making Money On Spotify, You Suck

Earlier this year, Spotify struck a deal with the majors. With the majors reportedly pocketing a cool $60-100 Million dollar advance. While independents got to rely on the hundreths of a cent per stream model. Don’t get me wrong – as a consumer, I love Spotify. But as a musician/artist, I think it sucks.

Spotify & Independents

The labels very likely have equity in Spotify as part of the deal. But who knows what they get in return, cause these deals are not transparent and are covered by (sometimes multiple) non disclosure agreements (NDAs).

Why Spotify Won’t Succeed

This of course prompted some indie acts to cry foul and pull their catalog off Spotify. Which in turn resulted in Jay Frank formerly of CMT and now DigSin to make the observation:

It’s Not Spotify’s Fault That You Make So Little Money

Zoe Keating rebutted this statement with a very eloquent and well thought out response.

Spotify, Indies & Lettuce

Other artists have made the same observation. Even commenting that they make more money on giving away music or even encouraging piracy of their music.

No Love for Spotify

Derek Webb – Giving Away Music Makes More Sense Than Spotify

It’s fine to say that Spotify is a great discovery platform. I don’t necessarily disagree. But discovery only helps if you have the opportunity for creating and nurturing long term relationships with prospective fans which Spotify doesn’t offer.

All this reflects a larger attitude in the mainstream where so called "power players" have decided that indies or DIYers are not worth bringing to the table in formulating decisions about the future of music. As Ariel Hyatt observes, independents don’t get invited to this party. Because the perception is that the content generated by indies is simply not good or valuable enough.

Should also be noted here that I know Jay Frank. He is a good guy. He is also an author who has a book out about writing hits based on prevailing trends in hit songs. This algorithm can then presumably predict the possibility of a song becoming a "future hit." Not sure where prior knowledge regarding song craft or God forbid, emotion, comes into play.

SOPA – Piracy vs Parity

This fall some members of Congress introduced the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). The bill is being pushed by the RIAA & the MPAA. After reading much of it at Open Congress (follow the money trail), I’ve decided that this bill is a bad idea and bad policy.

So I joined forces with a small but dedicated group of artists and tech innovators to work against this bill. One of the first things we heard from folks on the other side was how we don’t represent artists and creatives. I’m not sure who gets to decide who does or doesn’t represent any particular segment in the halls of Congress – but I’m pretty sure the entities espousing this bill on behalf of artists, songwriters and creatives don’t represent my views and those of forward thinking artists. Just ask Janis Ian.

Here’s a cool infographic about the legislation.

This bill has very little to do with protecting IP and everything to do with keeping a stranglehold on the channels of distribution. Loss of control of channels of consumption for the old school music business means loss of revenue from traditional income streams that feed an obsolete business infrastructure.

Because artists who have learned to leverage free and open forms of communication suddenly find themselves in a position of power over traditional power brokers who have gotten used to being in charge. They want to keep it that way.

Even under the present DMCA statute, the power can be abused as so aptly illustrated in the MegaUpload and Dajaz1 cases.

One of the ways to do this is to control what you get to see and hear online. The Stanford Law Review published a position paper on this. Read their take:

Don’t Break The Internet

Piracy is bad. Censorship is worse. The above by the way is an analysis of rev 2 of the bill. Which is the "less bad" version of the bill.

The entrenched old guard want SOPA because they want major labels and big business to control distribution. In turn indie/DIYers are denied an equitable market share. If anything this year has proven that indies need to be awarded more opportunities. Not less. A larger segment of indie content creators deserve the right to be heard and seen in the marketplace. Even on major commercial distribution channels in primary markets.

Consequently they are also entitled to a larger percentage of income streams generated by content they have helped create. Not just 9 cents. Or the bare minimum.

It’s worth noting here that while the RIAA and everyone in their camp have been complaining about piracy and declining music sales, CD Baby and TuneCore the main aggregators for digital music distribution used by indie artists are reporting sales in excess of $350 Million dollars in just the last 3 years. In each of those cases, there was no "down" year.

Chorney Chortling

Finally the largest volume of static this year was generated from the roots based indie/DIY ethic driven Americana genre. Linda Chorney, a NJ based indie artist, managed to leverage the Grammy 365 social network to get herself nominated for a Grammy in the Americana category.

Her music isn’t my cup of tea. But at least she sings on key and performs with conviction. And without any pyrotechnics or electronics to mask her deficiencies. That alone deserves some kind of award…

Even the egalitarianism espousing Americana community seems to be upset about someone leapfrogging over their place in line and picking the lock that christened gatekeepers have so carefully guarded. My friend, Paul Schatzkin, details this saga over at his blog at Cohesion Arts. Kim Ruehl over at No Depression also goes the distance with a look-see at this nomination. She also turned me on to the fact that Eddie Vedder has been nominated for Best Folk Album. What???

So you know where I am going with this, right? All of this "You’re Not Good Enough" messaging is hogwash.

It’s just that it’s in the best interest of the mainstream music establishment to perpetuate this myth. In spite of the successes of The Civil Wars’, Arcade Fires, Julia Nunes’, Pomplamooses, Louis CKs and Amanda Palmers of the world.

You see if these acts are acknowledged as being legitimate, reproducible accomplishments then those reverberations echo through the offices of the RIAA, MPAA and the hallowed hallways of The Grammys.

Suddenly highly paid gatekeepers and tastemakers become obsolete. Entire belief systems begin to crumble. The entire musical arena becomes a level playing field. There is no distinction between premium and low grade. There is only good and bad. And either can come from major labels or independent entities. The fact that they are pre-labeled as being one or the other is no pre determinant as to the quality of the content. The people consume and they get to decide.

This isn’t a paradigm shift. It’s a complete tearing down of the curtain to reveal what is real about music. All that is left is emotion, truth and the experience. Though having capital to invest and market in any business is critical, it’s not about how much money is spent behind an act. The main criteria for success will be how audiences respond. In fact to some extent, it will be all that matters. The monetizing will happen after the fact. Not before.

So in this season of gifts and miracles and new beginnings. Give yourself this gift. Know that you are good enough. Embrace it.

Then go knock out another brick in the wall…Happy New Year!

Feel free to share your thoughts below.

We’re offering up some specials on workshops, digital music marketing and web development/strategy for the holidays.  Sign up on the mailing list at the top right hand corner (ie. “Get In The Loop”) and we’ll make sure we get that info right to you.

Gift Certificates

Here are gift certificates you can buy in various denominations or any denomination you want (choose the last option – $0 and enter the amount of your choice. The lowest denonimation you can buy them in is $15. Any purchase for less than $15 will be rejected.

These gift certificates can be used to cover part of all of the cost for consulting sessions, web development, marketing strategy sessions, marketing campaigns or workshops. They are valid for one year from date of purchase.

There is a little bug in the WordPress software plug-in that requires you NOT enter the $ figure in the value box. Remove the $ sign and just type the numeral value and press Purchase.

Please note: The gift certificate application may notify you multiple times of a single purchase. It doesn’t mean you’re being charged multiple times by PayPal. If this makes you uncomfortable, please just email us directly from the contact page. Let us know the amount you want to purchase for a gift certificate and we will be glad to generate a gift certificate manually for you.  Our apologies for this inconvenience.

Ok, thanks in advance for your patronage. We look forward to seeing you soon. Go ahead and buy now!

Recently I heard a quote attributed to a music business executive that went something like this: "The new model doesn’t exist…"

Now I don’t know for sure if the exec actually said that. I think it’s incredibly easy to take a quote out of context. But I’d love to give that executive the benefit of the doubt. Mostly because I can’t honestly believe that it was framed that way by someone in the business.

That being said…it got me to thinking. Just what exactly would qualify as success or viability in the "new model" by the present day music business establishment?

Because from where I sit the new model does exist. Furthermore it seems to be thriving. It has it’s own set of challenges for sure, but there’s plenty of evidence to suggest that there is viable forward momentum and traction.

Test Cases

In our workshops we spend a lot of case study time with Julia Nunes, the college dorm room musical ingenue who took cover songs on an ukulele to millions of viewers on YouTube. She then managed to parlay that into opening for Ben Folds and playing Bonnaroo two years in succession. This past June she raised upwards of $77000 via her own "Julia Nunes Would Be Nothing Without Me" campaign on Kickstarter for her indie CD project. That’s a monetary figure that most new acts would kill for in a recording & promotional budget. She has a confident vulnerability that deeply resonates with her audience and even with folks who don’t even know her that well.

It exists with Corey Smith, a Georgia based singer who built an audience around live touring and giving away music which resulted in a $2 million/year operation. He now has strategic partners that help with distribution, marketing & promotion – but still no partnership with any major label. He produces & sells alternative country music that is outside of the strict confines of the mainstream country music industry and makes a very comfortable living doing so. He also happens to have a really great partner in his genius manager, Marty Winsch. Read more at TechDirt or listen to his podcast on CDBaby.

And then of course, there’s the current poster child for all of this – The Civil Wars. The indie music story of the year. A duo built around great songwriting, a spiritual sympatico between the principals Joy Williams and John Paul White, and a savvy, compassionate management team made up of Nate & Travis Yetton. They’d be the first to admit they got a fair bit of luck – but once they had it – they knew how to capitalize on their opportunities. They are a pioneering case on how to marry new technology with tried and true "old school" music business methods such as touring, music placement and conventional publicity and press. Also to their credit and ever evolving vision, they’ve elected to stay independent for now.

Songwriters Only

And there are even new paradigms for folks who consider themselves "only" songwriters.

Two years ago one of my heroes, Seth Godin, came to Nashville for the Country Radio Seminar and said that perhaps the days of the pure songwriter may be done. I disagree.

The solution I think is innovative and strategic partnerships with other kinds of artists & content creators and providers. Here are two specific examples of songwriters finding their way forward in the new world order in projects that are songwriter driven.

The 1861 Project is a collection of new original songs inspired by the people who fought and lived through the U.S. Civil War – a contemporary take on Civil War music. Bill Flanagan of CBS Sunday Morning says of the project:

"Like all great music, it proves how human emotions transcend specific time and circumstances."

Peter Cronin, the project’s creative director talks a little bit about what made the project work:

"Our ace publicist (that’s me!) managed to stir up serious press coverage on the national, regional and local levels. Paul Schatkin’s pre-release marketing efforts via social media generated considerable buzz and built sufficient fan interest…"

"…we found one way to get a grip on all of it – get in, get your hands a little dirty and be prepared to put on a new hat if need be."

Amanda Havard’s "Survivors" project is really about a series of books. She is an author. But she is also a songwriter. Together with music producer and songwriting partner, Deanna Walker, she has written a collection of songs that complement the books. Together they own all the content. And the name of the game these days, ladies and gentlemen is content, content, content…This is "Pretty Girl", a song performed by Chris Mann (a member of The Warblers on Glee).

According to Derek Baird, "What makes this series really interesting is the way that Havard has woven social media into both her own creative process as well as the reader’s experience. She has an exciting and new vision for YA Fiction that incorporates all types of media to share the story of The Survivors."

Disconnect

There’s still a fair amount of discussion about what should be done by majors in order to survive this change. Like in this article entitled "Broken Records." There are also posts and commentary making a case that indies are inferior to majors. Such as this article by a mainstream industry insider about how indies should stop complaining about the low pay rates on Spotify when compared to their more illustrious cousins on major labels. According to the original poster, the majors bring "better quality" and "higher demand" to the table and therefore are thoroughly justified in getting higher pay rates. What?!!

So there still seems to be a huge disconnect between these two worlds.

It almost seems like there is a certain reluctance to adopt or embrace the new grassroots style paradigms because it doesn’t fit some archane, outdated business model. Furthermore it feels like new models are being held to impossibly unattainable standards – ones that even the major labels don’t hold themselves to anymore.

Let’s be clear things are very much in the messy, primordial soup phase of things in the new world order. But let us remember that for a time there even radio didn’t want to initially pay PROs for the work of songwriters. So much so broadcasters formed BMI so that they wouldn’t have to negotiate with ASCAP whom they thought treated them unfairly. Sound familiar?

Look I’m not here to beat up on the major labels. In fact I’m grateful for my musical evolution which for the most part was informed by the majors. And the majors certainly bring "bank" to the equation.

But I think it is time to temper expectations and start learning about our customers on our own. Outside of focus groups and within the setting of real world experiences. We need to go back to relating directly to the music fan and figuring out how to bring emotional capital and most importantly emotional connection back to the musical experience. Even with technology. I believe the beginning of the erosion of the old school music business model began when the industry became obsessed with selling pieces of plastic more than nurturing the emotional nature of music.

Courage

Courtesy of Ian Rogers, Topspin Media

In our Rock Your Net workshops we spend a lot of time educating artists and songwriters on how to convert from the old model to a new way of doing things. There is a lot of nervousness and trepidation. Some of this is understandable for there is a great deal of uncertainty going forward. But some of it is unnecessary fear and trauma from certain sources within the industry perpetuating a myth that all consumers want to do is steal. And that giving away free music in order to gain fans and build awareness devalues it.

There is nothing more crippling than believing your potential customer base cannot be trusted. In fact, it is downright deadly.

To quote Tim O’Reilly, "Obscurity is a far greater threat to authors and creative artists than piracy"

It is time to re-learn and recalibrate what we want as artists, songwriters and content creators in the new world order of the music business. We may find that our journey will be wrought with all kinds of disappointment and pitfalls. But there is plenty of evidence in the examples above to suggest that there is also great opportunity.

We just need the courage to seize it.

This article received valuable insight & contributions from Alex Curtis of The Creators Freedom Project & Michael Lovett of Phat Magnet Media.

The Future of Music Coalition is running an artist revenue streams survey to learn about the different forms of income by artists, musicians and songwriters. Please consider participating.

Updates

Thursday, September 15th – Ariel Hyatt confirmed for keynote.

Wednesday, September 28th -Gavin Mikhail speaks on “The Power of Video.”

Intro To Digital Marketing Series

On Wednesday, September 7th we again present Rock Your Net’s hugely successful & popular “Intro To Digital Marketing” workshop series. The series is a hands-on, interactive internet music marketing seminar targetting musicians, artists, songwriters, publishers and their affiliated managers. By the end of the series you will be able to:

• Create and implement a plan to market your music.
• Build and extend your online presence & infrastructure with tools such as Virb, BandZoogle, BandCamp, Reverbnation and TopSpin.
• Use YouTube, FaceBook & Twitter to build awareness for your band and your brand.
• Learn how to acquire and engage your fans. Help them help you have a sustainable music career.
• Set up an online store to sell your music and merchandise direct to fan (DTF).

Also includes admission to keynote by Ariel Hyatt on Thursday, Sept 15th.

When: September 7th, 14th, 15th (Thursday), 21st & 28th (All Wednesdays except where denoted otherwise)

Time: 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm.

Where: ESPACES

We recommend you come to all sessions since we’ll be covering different topics each week. But you’re welcome to come to as many as you are able to attend. Space limited to 25 participants per session. If you sign up prior to September 4th, you’re eligible for an early bird discount.

The workshops will be held at ESPACES – a state of the art meeting, teaching and workspace facility(near St Thomas Hospital) minutes from Nashville’s Music Row on Harding Rd.

Bring your laptop. Take it with you. Rock happily ever after.

Register for Workshop

The first session ended on September 7th. This admission is for the rest of the series and the keynote by Ariel Hyatt.

Keynote: Ariel Hyatt – Thursday, September 15th, 2011

Ariel Hyatt is the founder of Ariel Publicity, a social media PR firm based in New York. Her Cyber PR ® Campaigns place musicians on blogs, podcasts, and Internet radio stations and coach them to create authentic relationships with fans. Since 1996, Ariel Publicity has represented over 1,500 independent musicians of all genres.

Her book Music Success in Nine Weeks helps artists navigate the world of social media and online marketing. Ariel has spoken at SXSW (Interactive and Music), CMJ, ASCAP’s I Create Music Expo, The Future of Music, NARAS, and The Taxi Road Rally, and dozens more. She is also a graduating member of Leadership Music.

Register for Workshops

Register Now

Intro To Digital Marketing – Single Sessions

Weds., Sept. 7th :: Session I – Introduction, Overview, Setting Goals

This session has ended

Weds., Sept. 14th :: Session II- Creating A Plan II, Implementation & Strategy

Weds., Sept 21st :: Session III – Web Sites & Selling Direct To Fan, Social Media I

Weds., Sept. 28th :: Session IV – Social Media II, The Power of Video

Power Tools :: WordPress & Topspin

We will also be offering a separate workshop series for more advanced musicians, artists, marketers and managers. We present the Power Tools series that will cover how to use WordPress & Topspin.

One of the web’s most powerful content management systems – WordPress, can be combined with Topspin, a music marketing direct to fan platform to create a powerful fan acquisition and marketing system that is second to none. Learn how to build a basic WordPress web site. Then integrate Topspin into the site and into your online presence to get the word out about your music.

You must be signed up for Topspin on at least a trial basis. Any extra charges you incur to join Topspin are not included in this workshop. You cannot borrow/loan/share an account, since it violates the Topspin terms of service. You will also need to be able to install or have installed WordPress on a hosting service of your choosing. We recommend MediaTemple or Hawkhost. Hostgator is also a good inexpensive service. We do not recommend GoDaddy or Dreamhost for mission critical applications. Your music marketing web site is a mission critical application.

This particular workshop is an all day workshop that will be held over 2 days. Tentative dates are Friday, Sept 23rd and Saturday, Sept 24th. Sessions begin at 10 AM and end at 5 PM. Lunch will be provided.

Not for newbies unless you’re taking this seminar with the Intro to Digital Marketing Series. Some familiarity with online or digital marketing is recommended. Class size is small with a maximum of 10 participants.

A workshop scholarship for the “Intro” series is available to one lucky applicant courtesy of Paul Schatzkin & Cohesion Arts. Ask a friend or a fan to apply on your behalf by writing a letter of recommendation.

We will also be giving away at the end of the series:

• A year’s subscription to Bandzoogle
• A year’s subscription to TopSpin

The FaceBook event invite. Feel free to share.

This music technology educational initiative is possible due to the generosity of

and awesome sponsors such as:

If you are unable to attend, please sign up on our mailing list to get information and updates about future workshops. Graphics & web support by Michael Lovett of Phat Magnet Media. “It’s Not New Media Anymore” slogan courtesy of Rachel Barnhard of BigData Marketing.